From Financial Times, an interesting article with an interesting title - Stop pushing Zelenskyy into peace talks, warns EU’s top diplomat.
Kaja Kallas, the EU’s high representative on foreign affairs, said it was pointless pressuring Zelenskyy to consider peace talks when Russian President Vladimir Putin showed no desire to stop the war.
“There’s no point pushing Zelenskyy to talk when Putin doesn’t want to talk,” Kallas told the FT. “We can’t talk about peacekeepers when there’s no peace. And why is there no peace? Because Russia does not want peace.”
It’s hard to believe that Russia does not seek peace but instead aims for a continuous war. However, peace this time will likely be on predominantly Russian terms. The closest chance Ukraine had for peace was in Istanbul in April 2022, but this opportunity was derailed by Boris Johnson in the name of Western powers.
Over the last two years, there has not been a single serious peace plan proposed by Ukraine or its Western allies, which reflects the reality on the ground. At every opportunity, escalation was pursued instead. The results can be seen today with the naked eye.
“Supporting Ukraine now is much cheaper than enduring the war later. Russia hasn’t changed their goals"
With roughly €144 billion in aid only coming from the EU, this support is far from cheap. Adding to this is the complete collapse of the German economy due to the energy prices and crisis. And let’s not even begin to count the dead. Or is human life just another statistic?
No, Russia hasn’t changed its goals. Neither has the EU, by the looks of it. The US, on the other hand...
“The big question is, what is the security guarantee? . . . What actually is it, that is tangible?” Kallas said. “If it is not troops, if it is not long-range weapons, what is it actually that protects you and defends you when somebody is attacking you?”
Javelins, Patriot missile systems, Abrams tanks, F-16s, ATACMS... All were touted as game-changing weapons. Are these tangible enough, Ms. Kallas?
The topic of peacekeepers is already fading from today’s discussions. Sending NATO troops officially onto the battlefield to be used as bait, only to later blame Russia for escalation, is an incredibly risky strategy.
“We shouldn’t underestimate our own power and overestimate Russia’s power,” said Kallas. “We have to do everything to strengthen Ukraine right now because the stronger they are on the battlefield, the stronger they are behind the negotiation table — if they come to that point.”
That’s wishful thinking. The EU (and the US) have done everything they could to support Ukraine. However, weapons stockpiles are now depleted, and the Ukrainian army is plagued with problems—ranging from mass desertion and low morale to an inability to recruit more personnel.
But it was never really about Ukraine*, was it? It was always about waging a proxy war against Russia and Putin.
What’s even more frustrating for people like Kallas is that the Russian economy is not collapsing. Quite the opposite: it has found a way to sustain the war while also allowing the regular population to maintain a decent quality of life.
Mark Rutte is singing the same tune—when he’s not busy proposing cuts to pensions across EU countries.
I think we would be very wise to put some lid on this and focus on the business at hand . . . to make sure that Ukraine has what it needs to prevent Putin from winning.
Let 2025 be a year of peace there.
*except for the natural resources
